I've created a special feature for the print media and broadcasters ("Page Nine" regardless of where or when it runs), that covers stories afresh, not the way news rooms typically flavor things. It would help reduce the distrust so many news consumers feel and could be the most avidly followed item you carry -- if you carry it. It certainly is well received by my audience.

This casual sample might make you say, "We'll NEVER run that!" but Page Nine is being built around ad revenues from clear-thinking mainstream businesses.

Our brand new 32-page full-color catalog is hot off the press. Send a street address and we'll send you one at no cost, full of cool new stuff -- DVDs, books, even "Guns Save Lives" buttons you can't get elsewhere.books@gunlaws.com

HELLER UPDATE:
The SCOTUS process is pretty secretive, but it's generally understood that right after orals, the Justices go into a room behind the curtain and take a tentative voice vote to see where they stand, so they likely knew the thrust right after orals on March 18.

By now, rough or near final drafts must be circulating, so the authors of the opinion, the concurrences and the dissents if any are known, with the paramters sketched out. Each Justice has four clerks, so at least 45 people know what's up. And they ain't talking. Decision could come out any day, typically on a Monday, and not later than 6/23/08. I sure hope it doesn't come out while I'm on vacation from 6/6 to 6/15.

Whichever side "wins," I predict the other side will scream "judicial activism of the worst kind!" (watch for that phrase!) ignoring any facts or the arguments of the decision, which I predict will be robust. The media will report from the Syllabus (the non-binding summary), without reading the case, and news reports will be spin-heavy. I'll study the entire decision, talk to experts, and tell you what it really says a few days later.

"The fight for freedom is never dull and always important."
--Jordan Rose, The Rose Law Firm, at the Goldwater Institute Banquet for Newt Gingrich, 5/17/08

CORRECTION
In those Baltimore Sun maps I posted of murders by race, I stupidly quoted the population of the state instead of the population of Baltimore. D'oh! The ratio is different, but the anomaly of blacks killed to whites killed is still a stunning rebuke of the widely promoted myth that "gun violence," is the core issue, instead of the "untouchable" demographic and socioeconomic problem. Thanks to Phil Lee in Arizona for spotting the error.

Polar bears have been added to the endangered species list, because melting Arctic sea ice caused by global warming threatens them with extinction.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

More than 32,000 scientists have now signed a petition urging the United States government to reject global warming hysteria, the Kyoto accords, and similar radical proposals, seriously undermining the global warming agenda. The news has been ignored by lamestream outlets for unknown reasons.

The alarm agenda is promoted primarily by 1,600 people involved with a U.N.-approved political body, the International Panel on Climate Change. Many IPCC signatories disagreed with its released conclusions and fought to have their names removed from the document. Many in the IPCC are politicians or have no credentials in the field.

The group says, in part, "The purpose of the Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of "settled science" and an overwhelming "consensus" in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climatological damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis."

They go on to say, "The human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity and that government action on the basis of this hypothesis would unnecessarily and counterproductively damage both human prosperity and the natural environment of the Earth."

The petition itself points out that, "There is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

It is virtual exhoneration for the "cynics, skeptics, deniers and Luddites" who are viciously accused by Oscar-winner Al Gore, his followers, and the U.N. of harming Mother Earth.

In other news, the left-leaning Weekly Spin newsletter laments that, "A new TNS survey finds what some might call a 'bitter' market segment who do 'not respond well to green messaging.' These so-called Eco Villians are 'predominantly Midwestern, middle-income family-men in small to mid-sized metro areas. Eco Villains do not believe in global warming, disdain eco-conscious products and suspect that environmental media coverage is propaganda.'"

Now that the whole global whining scheme has been shaken by tens of thousands of true scientists, the proposed U.N. and domestic taxes, market controls and population-management plans are in jeopardy, but no one expects them to give up such clever and awesome raw power without a fight, let alone to save face. Al "Big-Carbon-Footprint" Gore could not be reached for comment.

Getting back to the starting point, polar bears have been added to the American endangered species list, because most other nations do not have such lists.

Canada, a land mass that has ice and snow on it, has raised some objections, since polar-bear management involves, among other things, hunting and tourism that brings significant revenue to the largely frozen nation. Some 60 hunts already underway, with a minimum cost of at least $10,000 each, will need some sort of exclusion for trophies already taken or planned. Giving up future revenue because some other nation keeps animal lists is reportedly unpopular.

----------

2- Space Station Gun

The lamestream media told you:

Almost nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

In a report found at Florida-based WESH-TV.com and at other sites, the Russian built International Space Station keeps a gun on board. NASA and federal officials have been quiet about the RKBA in space.

The type of gun is a mystery, but it doesn't seem like anything most people have ever seen. Cosmonauts have apparently been carrying firearms into space routinely in their survival kits.http://www.wesh.com/news/15298911/detail.html

MSNBC, in typical gun-ignorance fashion, rambles on about spy control, bug-eyed alien monsters, a practical need for arms in off-course tundra landings and asks the innevitable, "Is it safe?" question, disregarding the more obvious question (to people who understand the role of firearms), "Is it safe without one?"

According to the posting, "astronauts and cosmonauts take a few hours to fire several rounds from each chamber off the deck of the training ship." It was unclear why it takes a few hours to fire several rounds.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23131359/page/2/

One astronaut describes, "firing flares, birdshot and a hard slug from its three barrels, during sea and winter survival training," and mysteriously says, "I can't say it is very unique."

The report also says, "Astronaut Dave Wolf, who spent four months aboard Russia's Mir space station in 1997-98, agreed that the space weapon was 'a wonderful gun. I found it to be well-balanced, highly accurate and convenient to use.'"

MSNBC says it is an "all-in-one weapon with three barrels and a folding stock that doubles as a shovel and contains a swing-out machete." I am not making this up. "Three types of ammunition -- rifle bullets, shotgun shells and flares -- come in a belt attached to the gun."

A retail selling price or model number was not listed. If anyone can find a picture, do send it along.

----------

3- Traffic Stop Surprise

The lamestream media told you:

Sheriff Joe Arpaio, "America's Toughest Sheriff," has been pulling over motorists for traffic violations, and then interrogating them to determine if the passengers are undocumented migrant workers. His efforts have led to the identification and deportation of countless migrants from the county's streets, driving cars with improper equipment or in violation of traffic laws.

Immigrant advocates protest the efforts, saying it amounts to racial profiling, is an unfair discrimination against immigrants, outside the Sheriff's authority, and frightens people legally in the country.

Unfortunately for the protesters, federal authorities recently cited Sheriff Joe's campaign as exemplary and a model for other agencies to copy.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

A driver was pulled over in Guadalupe, a virtually Mexican shanty town in the southern suburbs of Phoenix, for driving at night with only a single headlight. On questioning, the driver had no proof of insurance and no proof of vehicle registration in the vehicle, in addition to the broken headlight violation.

The driver complained bitterly, and publicly, claimed unfair treatment, suggested she should have been let off with only a warning, and said it was retaliation against her, and that the sheriff is racially profiling people of color, despite the dangerous broken headlamp. She asked the deputy on the scene why he works for someone "who harrasses people with brown skin."

The driver was the mayor of Guadalupe, Rebecca Jimenez. She said she'd like to end the 30-year contract with the Sheriff for providing police services (the town has no police of its own). Sheriff Joe with typical candor said he would be glad to get out of there because, "Nobody wants it."http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/116355

----------

4- Government Declares Summer

The lamestream media told you:

Leslie Wanek of the National Weather Service said high temperatures are coming as the first 100 degree day in Phoenix is expected shortly. Official warnings on the dangers of hot days have been issued to all news outlets, with advice to drink plenty of water, stay indoors during the hottest parts of the day, use sunscreen, and wear hats and appropriate clothing. Wanek's initial heat announcement ran on page one.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

In yet another infuriating sign that "news" media has become a lapdog of government and hopelessly reliant on "officials" for virtually all its information, even weather and heat advisories are now dependent on government edict. No one at the local papers apparently had sufficient authority to independently say summers in the desert get hot, and proper caution is wise when exposed to hot desert.

It was unclear at press time whether schools have taught students that summers in the desert are hot, and people outdoors in desert heat need to drink water or wear "loose fitting clothing." According to unsubstantiated rumors, people used to know these things without government or school aid.

By issuing advisories on weather conditions, the government wisely (from their point of view) increases peoples' reliance on the state for everything from food and drink to hot summer days. "Reporters" are complicit in helping to reduce individual self reliance in the clever scheme. Major "news" organizations employ meterologists, formerly known as weathermen, but they were at a government climate conference and could not be reached for comment.

----------

5- Self Defense Denied

The lamestream media told you:

"Campus-gun bill dies in Senate"

"A bill that would allow some students, professors and administrators to carry guns on Arizona's college campuses is dead -- at least for this year," writes Scott Wong, on page one on the local "news" section in Gannett's number two paper, The Arizona Republic.http://tinyurl.com/47lgx8

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Self Defense Bill Killed by Senate

A bill that would ensure the civil rights of FBI-certified, trained, permitted, specially taxed and DPS-monitored citizens to possess sidearms for self-defense when on college campuses was denied a vote by the state senate.

The bill's sponsor, Sen. Karen Johnson, said she thought many lawmakers, facing re-election, didn't want to take a position on such a controversial issue, and brought pressure to have the bill killed.

With news coverage that perpetually casts self-defense, personal-safety and civil-rights-protection bills as students-with-guns laws, this comes as little surprise.

The issue was exposed in the paper itself, in a letter I wrote to them, which some people said was a miracle to see in print.http://tinyurl.com/6ysrpd

----------

6- Jews Score One

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Former CIA director James Woosley, a Presbyterian, in an interview in Canada, makes a point often missed in the rancorous debates about Israel, anti-Semitism, and islamofascism. The idea that the law is above the rulers was handed to civilization by... the wandering Jews. In an article provocatively entitled, "We're All Jews," he writes:

"It's not only the other two great Abrahamic religions, Christianity and Islam, that owe a substantial debt to Judaism, it's the world as a whole. The reason is that between three and four millennia ago something happened in the Sinai among a tribe of refugees from Egyptian oppression that introduced the world to the concept of the rule of law -- the idea that the law is not the whim of, but rather has its source above, those who rule.

"This concept is at the heart of what makes decently-governed societies possible, whether you sign on to Jefferson's formulation that we are "endowed by our Creator" with basic rights or prefer the more secular notion of natural law..."

"This supremacy of the law is what most Americans mean when they say that we have a 'government of laws, not men...'"

"I've mainly been in synagogues for the bar mitzvas and bat mitzvas of friends' children. The next time you are, notice what the object of veneration is -- it is the Torah, the law itself. At a point in the service it is carried, lovingly, around the congregation, greeted as an old friend. I am convinced that it is this veneration of the law -- with its status above the ruler -- that is at the heart of anti-Semitism.

"Jews have almost always been the first target of tyrants, because their beliefs and religious practices, honed by nearly two millennia in Diaspora, clearly declare that in their view the law is above the ruler."

He makes a point. And his sorta defense of Nixon and Clinton as emblematic of the American non-empire is fresh thought worth reading.http://tinyurl.com/5lrf9n

----------

7- Special Guest Columnist Craig Cantoni:

How Mack the Millionaire became Mack the Knife

By Craig J. Cantoni

Mack and Zack grew up in the same working-class neighborhood, are the same age, have the same education, earn the same salary, have the same number of kids, and have worked for 40 years in the same construction trade. The only difference between them is that Mack has $1 million in savings and Zack has zilch in savings.

Mack has a million and Zack has zilch, because Mack saved and invested $10,000 a year by living below his means. Mack lives in a much smaller house than Zack lives in, drives a much smaller and more fuel-efficient car than Zack drives, goes out to eat far fewer times than Zack does, and, unlike Zack, doesn't spend money on lottery tickets, professional sporting events, trips to Vegas, cigarettes, drinks at sports bars, and a big-screen TV and other electronic gizmos.

To stay healthy and save even more money, Mack grows produce in his backyard and consumes far fewer calories, far less fat, and far less alcohol than fat Zack does.

Mack's savings have been transformed into capital, which in turn has been invested in equipment, technology, productivity improvements and new companies, thus increasing tax revenue for the government, reducing the amount of money borrowed from foreigners, increasing the value of the dollar, and benefiting Zack and other Americans.

In spite of the good that Mack the Millionaire has done for society, Democrats think that it is unfair for him to have more money than Zack. Teaming up with likeminded rapacious Republicans, they want to punish Mack for his frugality and reward Zack for his profligacy. They are planning to raise the capital gains tax on Mack's investment income and reinstitute the estate tax so that Mack has to bequeath his money to Zack instead of his own family.

Even crueler and more insidious, Democrats and their partners in crime across the aisle want to print money to cover their own profligate political spending, thus reducing the value of Mack's savings with inflation.

They want to do the same thing to industrious people who have worked hard in K-12 school, invested in their future, obtained a degree in a rigorous discipline, and deferred marriage and procreation until they were ready for both.

Democrats call this fairness and social justice.

Whatever they call it, it is suicidal.

Mack cannot stop the robbers by voting, because Zack and his ilk outnumber savers like him by a wide margin, due to the government punishing savers and rewarding spenders. The latest example was the government bailout of people who bought homes they couldn't afford.

Mack realized a couple of years ago that he had two choices. One choice was to stop saving and become a moocher like Zack.

The other choice was the moral choice: to grab a knife or other weapon and defend himself and his family against the robbers in Congress.

When you ask Democrats these questions, they consistently pick the Republican answer. They just think they're Democrats, and follow those candidates out of herd mentality (which is all some of them have). Hey, Republicans follow the herd too, so don't think I'm just banging on one side. Try asking your Demo friends, and see what they say. It's fun!

Would you like more freedom or less freedom?

Would you like to pay more taxes or less taxes?

Would you like government to tell you what you can peacefully do in your own bedroom?

Do you want the government to tell you who your doctor can be?

Do you want government agents or your doctor to tell you what medicines you should or can have?

Should the government be able to restrict your ability to protect your children or spouse?

If you save your child's life in a desperate criminal emergency by using a gun, but didn't take a government approved test first, or get some paperwork approved, should you go to prison?

Do you support government taking money from you, and giving to other Americans they think need it?

Does your answer change for giving your money to people who aren't Americans?

Does your answer change for giving your money to subsidize someone's business, or an industry, or rich people?

Do you think government should have the power to prevent you from educating your child as you see fit?

If you personally want your child to have a moment to pray while at public school, should government be empowered to prohibit your choice?

Now if we can just get Republicans to act like Republicans, problems solved!

--------

9- Counterintuitive Man says:
Unequal treatment is a good thing!

People who want everything equal and nothing offensive should go live where that has support -- so the rest of us can peacefully enjoy it when:

Smart students get better grades that dumb ones!

Hard workers make more money than lazy workers!

Great athletes make more money than lousy ones!

Unmarried women who pop out lots of babies don't live as well as married couples with two incomes and two children!

People who speak redneck, ebonics or spanglish can't get jobs as phone operators for large companies with national clientelle!

Folks who lie and decieve can get jobs as politicians! Uh, maybe that one's wrong.

Repair men who can actually fix things attract lots of business, and the rest starve!

Stores that offer good products at low prices thrive, even when community activists protest and call them names!

Yes, unequal treatment is a bedrock of American success, provides incentives, rewards and drives us to a brighter better day!

--------

If this report works for you --tell your friends!
Sign up (or off) for email delivery:alan@gunlaws.com

Dear Alan, i just finished reading your Duquesne speech...well done, you did an excellent job! I am so inspired by your words, your passion & your spirit. In addition to being a member of USCCA, I'm a member of the NRA & Gun Owners of America. I know you're busy, so I just want to say that if there's anything I can do "for the cause", please let me know. Keep up the great & noble work! Regards, Jim B.
[Read about it here: http://www.gunlaws.com/newstuff.htm]

Alan, Re: The Duquesne speech, you did an excellent job !! I'm going to send this to a few people I know that should read what you said so well, common sense is the key. I don't know any gun owner or NRA member that would dispute anything you said, and speaking of the NRA I hope they carry this story in the next issue of the magazine so all could read it. Thanks, Dennis P.

Alan - Having just read your piece on the Duquesne speech, linked from comments at the Huffington Post, http://tinyurl.com/5cc8nc I would like to thank you for what you did. It took great courage to stroll into the lion's den and announce "I am king" (again, no laughs...lol). But seriously, you served the cause well and for the many voices that will never write to you personally, but instead, simply be alive because of people such as yourself who are willing to enter a public forum and argue the basic right to defend one's life, thank you. Sincerely, Travis D., USN (Retired)

... I, for one, am extremely grateful that you were there to stand up for our Rights and provide a voice of truth and reason. Your speech is probably one of the few instances where objective discourse actually caused college students to think. To really think for themselves without fear of losing a grade by offending a liberal/socialist professor. Please keep up the battle for truth and reason. Sincerely, Dean B., Pittsburgh

Alan, I just finished reading your letter on the USCCA website, about your speech in Pittsburgh. I can't thank you enough for your courageous efforts in delivering that speech. Few of us would have been brave enough and fewer still could have found the right words.
Exposing the truth about Anti-rights is the only logical solution. Educating those who have been misguided is the only way to win this battle. I pray that more of us will be able to " find the right words" when the opportunities arise. Your letter has certainly inspired me to do more. Thank you again,
Dennis J., Oklahoma